Reds manager Dusty Baker asked management about a contract extension, according to a major-league source, but evidently the team is not yet ready to decide upon his future.

Baker, in the last year of his deal, could be replaced if the Reds continue to flounder.

Ghosts of 1990

04-26-2010, 04:55 PM

I'm glad to know that he is interested in the continuation of his employment here though, and not packing it in like some have suggested.

Brutus

04-26-2010, 04:56 PM

"Are you confident in the 'I Love You' return? Because if you don't get that return, that's a pretty big matzo ball hanging out there."

Homer Bailey

04-26-2010, 05:03 PM

I can honestly not think of one reason why I would want Dusty to return. Honestly, not one. Sure, he's not to blame for everything. Maybe he shouldn't be blamed for any of it. But I don't see how bringing him back next year will help this team at all. It just doesn't seem like a good fit. Dusty is a great guy, and I thoroughly enjoyed the one conversation that I had with him, but I do NOT want him as the Reds manager past 2010.

LincolnparkRed

04-26-2010, 05:04 PM

He pulled the same thing in Chicago at the end of 2005 and in spring training, then DLee got hurt early in 2006 and all his talk about extensions stopped. It moved on to the "injuries dude" until they fired him in August or September

RedsManRick

04-26-2010, 05:13 PM

While it's good news on the surface of it, it leaves me a bit concerned. If Dusty is worried about his job security come August/September, how likely is he to prioritize the short term wins and losses compared to the long term implications of pushing his players hard? History suggests Dusty prefers to play for the immediate return. Not good. If the Reds don't intend to bring him back, I'd love to see him sent on his way sooner rather than later solely for the sake of our young pitchers' arms.

flyer85

04-26-2010, 05:45 PM

History suggests Dusty prefers to play for the immediate return. always been that way, it's why he was never a good fit. However, the FO has never admitted to a youth movement and pointing a few years out in the future.

westofyou

04-26-2010, 05:51 PM

He pulled the same thing in Chicago at the end of 2005 and in spring training, then DLee got hurt early in 2006 and all his talk about extensions stopped. It moved on to the "injuries dude" until they fired him in August or September

He also had an extension tussle in his last year in SF, mostly owner based not GM, he didn't get it... he took the team to the WS though.

TheNext44

04-26-2010, 06:03 PM

While it's good news on the surface of it, it leaves me a bit concerned. If Dusty is worried about his job security come August/September, how likely is he to prioritize the short term wins and losses compared to the long term implications of pushing his players hard? History suggests Dusty prefers to play for the immediate return. Not good. If the Reds don't intend to bring him back, I'd love to see him sent on his way sooner rather than later solely for the sake of our young pitchers' arms.

Yeah, but he seems to play for the immediate return regardless of his contract situation. Prior, Zambrano and Wood were pitching 130+ pitch games during Baker's first year with the Cubs.

I'm not sure it will be any more of a concern than it was the last two years.

RedsManRick

04-26-2010, 06:04 PM

Yeah, but he seems to play for the immediate return regardless of his contract situation. Prior, Zambrano and Wood were pitching 130+ pitch games during Baker's first year with the Cubs.

I'm not sure it will be any more of a concern than it was the last two years.

Fair point. Best to just get rid of him now regardless. :evil:

Scrap Irony

04-26-2010, 06:08 PM

I'm glad to know the front office isn't willing to rubber stamp an extension. If Baker is fired, it'll be really interesting to see who the candidates would be. Will Jocketty go old-school or will he try someone new?

lollipopcurve

04-26-2010, 06:10 PM

Something to watch. Right now I have to question if Baker's refusal to meet the media -- an extremely unusual move by a major league manager -- reflects some instability on his part that may be related to his having been turned down. Pure, idle speculation, for sure, but you have to think that getting a rejection like that has to affect one's attitude, especially if the prospect of another losing season -- he hasn't had a winning team in a while -- begins to loom larger.

Unassisted

04-26-2010, 06:25 PM

The cynic in me wonders if it is more than a coincidence that this revelation comes out so soon on the heels of the hiring of Joe Morgan? Not implying that Joe is the manager-in-waiting, but that the Reds were sending a pre-emptive message that they are an employer that values diversity in the front office.

pedro

04-26-2010, 06:30 PM

Boy if the Reds did hire Joe Morgan I can only imagine the ruckus that would cause.

KronoRed

04-26-2010, 06:39 PM

Boy if the Reds did hire Joe Morgan I can only imagine the ruckus that would cause.

I can imagine the media and the 700 crew would love it, "Big Red Machine GUY OMG!!!"

Colossal disaster that it would be :D

Falls City Beer

04-26-2010, 06:45 PM

The guy clearly needs to stop signing on with bad franchises. Does anyone think for a second that this team would be a hair's breadth better with Larussa, say?

pedro

04-26-2010, 06:47 PM

I can imagine the media and the 700 crew would love it, "Big Red Machine GUY OMG!!!"

Colossal disaster that it would be :D

Indeed. But if Dusty's "theories" drive many hear at RZ crazy I can only imagine the heads exploding when JM opened his mouth.

westofyou

04-26-2010, 06:51 PM

The guy clearly needs to stop signing on with bad franchises. Does anyone think for a second that this team would be a hair's breadth better with Larussa, say?

What is the pay rate you get for mentioning anyone affiliated with the Cardinals?

It's got to be pretty nice.. have you thought of restructuring your deal? You do good work.

Falls City Beer

04-26-2010, 06:53 PM

What is the pay rate you get for mentioning anyone affiliated with the Cardinals?

It's got to be pretty nice.. have you thought of restructuring your deal? You do good work.

Larussa comes to mind as they're compared all the time, right or wrong? Okay, replace Larussa's name with Torre? It's still same crap Reds' 25 man, that ain't changin'.

Benihana

04-26-2010, 07:00 PM

What is the pay rate you get for mentioning anyone affiliated with the Cardinals?

It's got to be pretty nice.. have you thought of restructuring your deal? You do good work.

:lol:

Spring~Fields

04-26-2010, 07:08 PM

I don’t believe the rumor. Mr. Baker was said to not be worried about such things as a contract extension earlier in the spring. Mr. Jocketty had his position on continuity before even that.

Besides “it’s still early”.

How could the guy win with what Mr. Jocketty has given him in the way of pitching and offense that everyone is complaining about?

Give him a team with hitting and pitching like he had many years ago in San Fran and he will win, I don’t know how much players like that would cost though in 2010 forward.

I think Mr. Castellini should stand behind his own words and actions, and should stand up for his man, Mr. Baker and resign him to a long term contract with a hefty raise.

Captain Hook

04-26-2010, 07:44 PM

I can't imagine going to your boss and saying"I know things have been a little rocky so fan this year and last year we didn't do too good and the year before we did even worse but hey how about an extension and while your at it how about a raise".

I've never been a fan of Dusty but if he'd won here then I'd be happy with him coaching the team.I know everyone wants to talk about the roster he has had over his time in Cincinnati and that's fair.It hasn't been all that good.I still don't think the team has preformed to it's potential so far this year and I don't think they did Baker's first two season.IMO a good coach would have at least 1 winning season to point to or at least have this current team off to a good start.

Even considering my dislike for the guy I'd still give him some time this year.If the team is doing ok then let him finish the year.If in the end he manages to get the team into the playoffs or maybe just over .500 then maybe extension talks would be appropriate.

Spring~Fields

04-26-2010, 10:03 PM

Mr. Baker looks like he might be too high maintenance for the Reds.
They aren't use to spending what it takes for him to produce a winning team in the most recent decade.
They might have to add another 30-40 million to payroll.

Dusty's talent is taking a group of talented (read: expensive) players and making them gel. His skill is not in making a losing team into a winner.

Falls City Beer

04-26-2010, 10:47 PM

. His skill is not in making a losing team into a winner.

No manager possesses this skill. Or was that your point?

Tom Servo

04-26-2010, 10:52 PM

No manager possesses this skill. Or was that your point?
That's my point. With the talent on the team, there would ultimately be no major change in W-L's if we went from paying Dusty millions and paying Rick Sweet peanuts.

Captain Hook

04-26-2010, 10:54 PM

No manager possesses this skill. Or was that your point?

So a team wins 79 games under a poor manager.Your telling me that no manager, no matter how good, could've got that same team to 85 win?

I hear this often and will just never understand why someone would think this.

alexad

04-26-2010, 11:44 PM

Scott Rolen said the players love playing for him. After his no talk and ripping the team, they found a way to win on Sunday. Let us see if this carries over on the road trip.

I have always said the managers that have fire in their Belly's are the best for the Reds. Lou won a WS. Johnson got them to the playoffs. We all know what Sparky did and Johnny Mac has fire too. Since Johnson, the Reds have had YES men and guys with no spark. Nice guys, but nothing else. Narron, Boone, Pete Mack, In fact it has been so bad, I can not even remember all the managers in the past 15 years.

This organization needs fire in the manager. Dusty is a nice guy, but has no fire. I still think a Valentine or Showalter is the right personality to have leading this team.

Any ideas on guys who fit this description??

Slyder

04-27-2010, 12:00 AM

Hopefully he continues to be rebutted. I have said since the day he was hired he is/was/always will be a bad fit for this franchise. He could go to Philly, LA, NY, (insert franchise with money) and be a better fit. But for especially a young team we need someone to give these players guidance, they dont know all the ins and outs of their game like what Duhhhhsty had in Chicago with Derrek Lee, Aramis Ramirez or Barry Bonds, Matt Williams, or Jeff Kent in San Fran.

We have guys looking for an identity (Bruce, Dickerson, Stubbs, still Phillips is trying to be more than he is, even Votto) and Duhhhsty doesnt do enough to help mold them. He does better (looking mainly offensively) with Vets who can take what Duhhhsty says and apply it to their games effectively and efficiently. This team doesnt and lacks the leadership (which is a direct strike to Duhhhsty IMO) that it had to trade its "best starting pitcher spect" for a mid 30s third baseman with a history of back problems to fill the void because that isnt Duhhhsty.

Spring~Fields

04-27-2010, 12:09 AM

Any ideas on guys who fit this description??

I have to confess that I don’t.

I just think that the team is under funded by the Reds ownership group and has been for going on ten years.

If they were or had been working with a Tampa, Minnesota, Oakland or Florida model their low funding, can work, those organizations had success. That is not what Reds ownership has been doing.

This time they brought in Mr. Baker and Mr. Jocketty to implement the plans, and models that had made them each successful in their previous organizations, San Francisco, Chicago and St. Louis, but, they provide funding like they did for the late 90’s Reds organization. Not funding that is and was needed to make the St. Louis model successful over the years with Mr. Jocketty as a chief architect, here in Cincinnati.

Now they want Mr. Jocketty and Mr. Baker to work some kind of magic for the past two years and a piece with a St. Louis or Chicago type plan or model, how ? Those are much larger money operations.

Here they have a man and with a history of success as shown by his history in St. Louis, they brought him to Cincinnati due to that history and success, but, they don’t provide the funding that helps fuel his methods. Mr. Jocketty is stranded trying to build something against wealthy teams with one hand tied behind his back.

Then we, myself and other’s complain about Jocketty and his players, pitchers, his manager. Sometimes I have to think that they did the best they could with what they were provided by ownership.

Why does ownership get a free pass? Their the ones running the whole thing.

How many players, managers, general managers, and coaches have they turned over? To get basically the same end product?

westofyou

04-27-2010, 12:11 AM

FWIW Rich Aurilia was a rookie on the Giants, not a seasoned vet.

dougdirt

04-27-2010, 12:15 AM

Why does ownership get a free pass? Their the ones running the whole thing.

I know that I am not the only one who has said it, but I think problem numero uno is Bob stepping in too much. He doesn't get a pass from me. His 'win now' mantra set this organization back several years from the plan that was in place by the current GM who was trying to build from within and had that carpet ripped out from under him. Bob wants to win, but he doesn't have the money to do it the way he wants to (or at least doesn't want to lose money to do it the way he needs to spend to win how he wants) or the patience to win at the current budget he is willing to set for the Reds.

Slyder

04-27-2010, 12:17 AM

FWIW Rich Aurilia was a rookie on the Giants, not a seasoned vet.

Whooops was thinking of Matt Williams.

Captain Hook

04-27-2010, 12:41 AM

I have to confess that I don’t.

I just think that the team is under funded by the Reds ownership group and has been for going on ten years.

If they were or had been working with a Tampa, Minnesota, Oakland or Florida model their low funding, can work, those organizations had success. That is not what Reds ownership has been doing.

This time they brought in Mr. Baker and Mr. Jocketty to implement the plans, and models that had made them each successful in their previous organizations, San Francisco, Chicago and St. Louis, but, they provide funding like they did for the late 90’s Reds organization. Not funding that is and was needed to make the St. Louis model successful over the years with Mr. Jocketty as a chief architect, here in Cincinnati.

Now they want Mr. Jocketty and Mr. Baker to work some kind of magic for the past two years and a piece with a St. Louis or Chicago type plan or model, how ? Those are much larger money operations.

Here they have a man and with a history of success as shown by his history in St. Louis, they brought him to Cincinnati due to that history and success, but, they don’t provide the funding that helps fuel his methods. Mr. Jocketty is stranded trying to build something against wealthy teams with one hand tied behind his back.

Then we, myself and other’s complain about Jocketty and his players, pitchers, his manager. Sometimes I have to think that they did the best they could with what they were provided by ownership.

Why does ownership get a free pass? Their the ones running the whole thing.

How many players, managers, general managers, and coaches have they turned over? To get basically the same end product?

Jack Mckeon seemed to do well.

If Dusty can't can't get the job done this year then he should go.You can blame ownership along with the GM but managers just don't get to go on loosing year after year because he didn't get the players he needed.

By the way I think this team is fine and should compete this year.Dusty Baker agrees with this.Knowing this about Dusty, if the team doesn't compete isn't Dusty doing a poor job?Shouldn't he be fired?Shouldn't he himself agree that he should be fired?

If the the excuse is that Managers don't make that much difference and that the team is just lousy with or without Dusty then why pay him one of the higher salaries in baseball?To me, those who think this should be the first ones to want Baker out.

Spring~Fields

04-27-2010, 01:42 AM

Jack Mckeon seemed to do well.

Jack McKeon did have success in Cincinnati and Florida. He was with the Reds when the Reds funding was in line with the other teams, there were times before McKeon that the Reds had one of the higher payrolls in baseball. Bowden and Lindner brought in Griffey, and did not provide the tools or additional talent to go along with Griffey. One of the primary complaints back then was that the Reds would not succeed because the Griffey signing was taking up a large percentage of their payroll budget.

Jim Bowden seemed to do well at the same time, until the funding was held to the nineties levels, while St. Louis and Chicago went in a different financial direction. The Reds who were competitive, and even bettered St. Louis and Chicago was left in their wake.

If Dusty can't get the job done this year then he should go. You can blame ownership along with the GM but managers just don't get to go on loosing year after year because he didn't get the players he needed.

They have to have near equal to, equal to or greater than talent that produces with the other teams that are their primary competition or they simply are not suppose to come out ahead of the teams with greater production numbers. No general manager can provide that under some type of St. Louis or Chicago model or plan without the necessary funding, year after year to build, supply, and to correct mistakes that are going to happen, and compete, well, not compete, all teams compete. I mean be comparable to the better teams.

If the excuse is that Managers don't make that much difference and that the team is just lousy with or without Dusty then why pay him one of the higher salaries in baseball? To me, those who think this should be the first ones to want Baker out.

Normally I would reason as you have, why pay one three million to get what they can from one for 3-4 hundred thousand.

In this case ownership implied if not directly stated that they would support and supply Mr. Jocketty and Mr. Baker with what they needed by the very fact of bringing them both into Cincinnati. Those two came from success models that utilizes heavy funding. I don’t think those two would have accepted positions in Cincinnati if they had been given a clear and accurate picture. Just as Lou interviewed, and said, no thank you. I think that Jocketty and Baker would have passed too.

They brought in two higher profiled individuals with a history of success, that have to be supported by funds, and players to achieve what they were known for in their other organizations. The ownership group has not done that. They have not done that since 1999.

How many times have they fired someone only to get the same end product? There is a reason for that, that same end product, not all GM’s, managers, and coaches were bad.

The same thing is going to happen to Jocketty and Baker after time, but not because they are bad, but because ownership group fails to supply the complete support that they need to succeed under the win now/rebuild for the future plan.

By the way I think this team is fine and should compete this year. Dusty Baker agrees with this. Knowing this about Dusty, if the team doesn't compete isn't Dusty doing a poor job? Shouldn't he be fired? Shouldn't he himself agree that he should be fired?

This teams presumed success was based upon the pitching and defense, and yes, they have enough offense if the pitching and defense holds up and it still can adapt and adjust to turn out to be a team that is just fine, there is still time for that.

I felt earlier when they were marketing the team with such positives to excite the fan base, that it would exploit Mr. Baker because of some of his ideas on batting orders, speed, player substitutes, and playing time allotted by him, PA to the players with lower OBP.

Exploited meaning that when we all bought into their marketing and expected better and it did not show up, that he would be exploited because of some of his ideas, that stand out to the fans. That he consistently follows, that he would still be doing that in 2010.

But, Mr. Jocketty, his boss has it within his power and authority to talk with Dusty, and ask him to modify some of his ideas with the type or level of player talent that he has currently.

Before Dusty Baker.

Terminate this powerful association Carl H. Lindner, Mrs. Louis Nippert, William J. Reik and George L. Strike, the same people who have had an interest in the way things are ran and financial plans are executed in the Cincinnati Reds organization for decades, dating back to the Schott era and I suspect that you might see some refreshing changes to the team and the teams success.

In 1999 the Reds were 2nd to last in their own division and 20th overall in team payroll.The NYY of course led all teams at just 91 mil. and the league average was about 49 mil.Maybe not the same disadvantage financially that the team now faces but not exactly on par with the rest of baseball.

Most of the other things you point out makes perfect sense but really give no good reason to keep Baker around if this season ends and the team is below the .500 mark once again.

I've only been around RZ during Dusty's tenure as coach so I don't know what kind of things were said about his predecessors.I just wonder if there were these same excuses made for them.

In 1999 the Reds were 2nd to last in their own division and 20th overall in team payroll.The NYY of course led all teams at just 91 mil. and the league average was about 49 mil.Maybe not the same disadvantage financially that the team now faces but not exactly on par with the rest of baseball.

Those payrolls are all within reasonable range for the 90's. It is in the next decade where very large disparities appear each year, each building year, and time that goes with each year.

Ownership was having the taxpayers, using OPM other peoples money to build a new stadium under the mantra that they were buidling for 2003, when in fact they were keeping the expenses lean especially in player payroll, preparing for the sale of the team to take their profits from the equity of the sale of the team.

The Reds remained behind St. Louis and Chicago throughout the decade, and will continue to. They should, with the number disparity.
Or maybe catch up with some miracles from prospects or trades.

Most of the other things you point out makes perfect sense but really give no good reason to keep Baker around if this season ends and the team is below the .500 mark once again.

I've only been around RZ during Dusty's tenure as coach so I don't know what kind of things were said about his predecessors.I just wonder if there were these same excuses made for them.

They each had their own problems or issues that we criticized them for. Fans do that, it is a part of sports, and sports talk. The optimist defended them and ridiculed the skeptics, the skeptics ridiculed the organization, gm's, managers, coaches and players. The optimist were wrong, every year, unfortunately.

The real problem was that the teams lacked talent and production. You either trade for the talent, buy the talent, or grow the talent, it all cost money. The more you have, well you know.

Most money does not dictate that a team will win, most money and it's proper distribution, gives a greater opportunity to improve and win. We have all seen teams spend large sums and lose.

I wish that we could simulate Mr. Jocketty as the identicle GM over the 2000 decade for each organization and to see how the teams with their various funding would have came out. Of course that too will be variable, won't it?

Ron Madden

04-27-2010, 04:17 AM

I can honestly not think of one reason why I would want Dusty to return. Honestly, not one. Sure, he's not to blame for everything. Maybe he shouldn't be blamed for any of it. But I don't see how bringing him back next year will help this team at all. It just doesn't seem like a good fit. Dusty is a great guy, and I thoroughly enjoyed the one conversation that I had with him, but I do NOT want him as the Reds manager past 2010.

That might be because there is no good reason to want Dusty to return.

:)

Will M

04-27-2010, 05:00 AM

How about an incentivized contract for a manager? say base $1M. for every game won over 81 you get an extra $100K. then an extra $250K for each playoff round won?

Dusty is getting $3M a year. Thats more than most folks make in their entire life. seems a bit high as a base salary.

jojo

04-27-2010, 07:04 AM

While it's good news on the surface of it, it leaves me a bit concerned. If Dusty is worried about his job security come August/September, how likely is he to prioritize the short term wins and losses compared to the long term implications of pushing his players hard? History suggests Dusty prefers to play for the immediate return. Not good. If the Reds don't intend to bring him back, I'd love to see him sent on his way sooner rather than later solely for the sake of our young pitchers' arms.

Or maybe he's likely to refuse to talk to the media following a game more often.... :cool:

REDREAD

04-27-2010, 10:51 AM

Obviously, I don't know Cast personally, but he seems typical of many big coorporate executives. He seems to believe that if you put the right management in place, success will happen. I have seen this in many places I work.. Supposedly, "superstar" managers are put in place, and then they penny pinch on the "worker bees" that actually get the task done. After all, the worker bees are just commodities (in their opinion) and with the right leadership, the company will still succeed :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

I like the team's legitimate commitment to investing in the farm system, but if Dusty is let go, I see a high chance of an established manager coming to replace him. I doubt anyone is going to be able to convince Cast that he's better off spending 500k on a manager and 3.5 million on a bullpen arm (as opposed to 3.5 million on a manager and 500k on a bullpen arm).

lollipopcurve

04-27-2010, 10:54 AM

Baker is not Jocketty's choice. Would be interesting to see who he'd hire (provided Castellini backs off and lets him do his job), and we may find out before 2010 is up.

Falls City Beer

04-27-2010, 11:14 AM

I couldn't possibly care less who manages the Reds.

WMR

04-27-2010, 11:15 AM

Dusty has got some major stones asking for an extension, I'll give him that.

Blitz Dorsey

04-27-2010, 11:30 AM

Dusty asking for an extension right now is akin to me asking my wife if she minds if I have an affair.

WHAT? How about get the team going in the right direction and then MAYBE (but probably not) we can talk about an extension.

REDREAD

04-27-2010, 11:52 AM

Jack Mckeon seemed to do well.

That is true. I give Jack a good bit of credit for 1999.

However, Bowden had one of the best offseasons ever for a GM prior to the 1999 season. Got the team almost exactly what it needed.. Neagle, Tucker, Vaughn, Cameron.. Blended in with the existing youth perfectly. His only mistake was starting the season with Bere and Avery. If he had gotten a better starter pitcher from the start, the Reds might've made the playoffs.

REDREAD

04-27-2010, 11:53 AM

Dusty asking for an extension right now is akin to me asking my wife if she minds if I have an affair..

Hey,it doesn't hurt to ask :lol:

Degenerate39

04-27-2010, 11:55 AM

I'd like to see Rick Sweet get the job. He's already managed a good bit of the guys on the team and the guys that will be on the team soon.

pedro

04-27-2010, 12:01 PM

I'd like to see Rick Sweet get the job. He's already managed a good bit of the guys on the team and the guys that will be on the team soon.

I'd prefer the Reds didn't hire a 57 year old career minor league manager.

Been down that road, it seldom works, can't ever recall it working.

Homer Bailey

04-27-2010, 12:16 PM

Dusty asking for an extension right now is akin to me asking my wife if she minds if I have an affair.

I can't give you rep points, but I can give you my signature :beerme:

Spring~Fields

04-27-2010, 01:13 PM

That is true. I give Jack a good bit of credit for 1999.

However, Bowden had one of the best offseasons ever for a GM prior to the 1999 season. Got the team almost exactly what it needed

Is that the mark of a good general manager? Getting a team what it needs? Good results?

Is that what they are suppose to do so that their manager doesn't look so bad, like the Reds do these past few seasons?

REDblooded

04-27-2010, 01:19 PM

I've imagined a timeline on this:

Dusty: "Hey Walt, I think we've really laid some phenomenal groundwork here... I'd like to talk about next season. Would really love a shot at furthering that Cuban kids career"

Dusty: "Nah, maybe it was the mini-fridge acting up. Anyways, about that extension..."

Walt: "We can talk about it. But right now I really really have a craving for a few coneys. Do you mind running out and grabbing me a few? Remember, hold the mustard"

Dusty: "Sure Walt. I'll be right back..."

Dusty returns: "Here ya go pal. I'm gonna go grab my player evals real quick and then we can discuss a few things"

Dusty returns again: "Hey Walt, I couldn't find my evals. I swear I left them on the corner of my desk, but they're gone" "Come to mention it, I think somebody took all of the pictures off of my desk. Did you see anything?"

Walt: "No Dusty, Don't know what to tell ya"

Dusty: "Just noticed another thing... I couldn't find my line-up cards either. You know, the ones I had pre-ordered with the CF leading off and the SS in the two hole"

Walt: "About that... Times are hard right now, and we won't be ordering any more line-up cards that are filled out by the printing company... You're gonna have to make due with the blank ones for a little while... Anyways, great catching up with ya, I gotta run"

Walt: "Man, that buzzing is driving me crazy. I'm gonna have to call a repair man. Gonna have to ask you to step out so I can make this call... MMMkkkk?"

Tom Servo

04-27-2010, 01:28 PM

Dusty: Mr. Jocketty told me to talk to Mr. Castelleni and then Mr. Castelleni told me to talk to Mr. Jocketty and I still haven't received my extension and he took my tooth picks and he never brought them back and then they moved my wrist bands to storage room B and there were 'Reds 06 playoff tickets' on them...

Spring~Fields

04-27-2010, 01:35 PM

Jack Mckeon seemed to do well.

If Dusty can't can't get the job done this year then he should go.You can blame ownership along with the GM but managers just don't get to go on loosing year after year because he didn't get the players he needed.

One thing that I have noticed is that when the general manager is credited with doing a good job, the manager usually is also. It also seems to follow that when the general manager has not done a good job, the manager is usually not looking very good either.

Coincidences, or natural order of cause and effect?

Great Walt Jocketty with ownership enhancements $$$$
Not so good Walt Jocketty without ownership enhancements
Not so good Jim Bowden without ownership enchancements
Good Mozeliak with ownership enhancements $$$$

However, Bowden had one of the best offseasons ever for a GM prior to the 1999 season. Got the team almost exactly what it needed.. Neagle, Tucker, Vaughn, Cameron.. Blended in with the existing youth perfectly. His only mistake was starting the season with Bere and Avery. If he had gotten a better starter pitcher from the start, the Reds might've made the playoffs.

I don't completely disagree that Bowden did his job that season but it is pretty easy to look back and say the GM did well when the coach goes beyond his job and get a underpaid bunch to win 96 games.

Players having career years and playing over their heads usually don't have much to do with the GM.Going into that year Casey had just 312 major league ABs under his belt,Pokey Reese was Paul Yanish playing 2nd base,Aaron Boone didn't have many fans in Cincinnati and Mike Cameron was virtually unknown and those that did know who he was didn't think much of him after going .210/.285/.336 in 98.The pitching staff looked to be pretty week as well.The only real sure fire good move that Bowden made was getting Vaughn.

I'm not trying to say that team was terrible, just that there were likely as many questions about that bunch as there is with this current Reds team.

camisadelgolf

04-27-2010, 01:51 PM

Dusty: Mr. Jocketty told me to talk to Mr. Castelleni and then Mr. Castelleni told me to talk to Mr. Jocketty and I still haven't received my extension and he took my tooth picks and he never brought them back and then they moved my wrist bands to storage room B and there were 'Reds 06 playoff tickets' on them...
:D I hope I'm not the only one who gets this reference.

Captain Hook

04-27-2010, 02:10 PM

I mentioned that the one good thing that Bowden in 99 was bringing in Vaughn.It can certainly be argued that if Jockety had pulled off a similar move this off season then things would be different this year and that would probably be true.I just don't think Bowden can be given credit for doing something that he has since been criticized for and that clearly didn't work for the rest of his career as a GM.That was building a team around 1 slugger and neglecting pitching and many other parts of the team.It worked fine in 99 but the coach of that team deserves the majority of the credit IMO.

RichRed

04-27-2010, 02:14 PM

:D I hope I'm not the only one who gets this reference.

You're not. Good stuff, Tom (Milton) Servo.

TheNext44

04-27-2010, 03:22 PM

:D I hope I'm not the only one who gets this reference.

i used to have Milton saying, "Someone took my stapler" as my ring tone. :)

OnBaseMachine

04-27-2010, 09:50 PM

From John Fay's blog:

Dusty Baker said a report from foxsports.com that he asked for a contract extension is not true.

“Nothing to it,” he said. “Where do rumors like that come from?”

There was no time frame mentioned in the report. Baker, of course, is in the last year of a three-year contract.

I don’t believe the rumor. Mr. Baker was said to not be worried about such things as a contract extension earlier in the spring. Mr. Jocketty had his position on continuity before even that.

Besides “it’s still early”.

How could the guy win with what Mr. Jocketty has given him in the way of pitching and offense that everyone is complaining about?

Give him a team with hitting and pitching like he had many years ago in San Fran and he will win, I don’t know how much players like that would cost though in 2010 forward.

I think Mr. Castellini should stand behind his own words and actions, and should stand up for his man, Mr. Baker and resign him to a long term contract with a hefty raise.

The Reds' struggles under Baker have little to do with Baker.... however, suggesting the man get a hefty raise is a bit much ;).

jmcclain19

04-27-2010, 10:16 PM

So i've been reading this site for going on six seasons now. Every year
this topic seems to come up, and the same members trot out the same ideas -
Davey Johnson, Larry Dierker, the AAA manager, the bench coach, etc etc.
And I really don't see much of a difference.

I think Ron Gardinhire & Mike Sciossia are the two best managers in
baseball right now, yet you can visit any Twins & Angels board and see
those guys vilified on a nightly basis.

Honestly after realizing that in a post-Dusty Reds world, I don't have a
horse in the race to replace him. I think over the years I've grown to care
less and less of who is at the helm of the Reds, and ask that he only not
destroy the hand of cards dealt to him by the GM.

I'd love to hear some compelling arguments for replacement ideas, because
any of the ones suggested year after year on this site I've got pretty
strong doubts/thoughts going the other direction

Spring~Fields

04-27-2010, 10:25 PM

The Reds' struggles under Baker have little to do with Baker.... however, suggesting the man get a hefty raise is a bit much ;).

It's not up to me. :) I have zero clout or input with the Reds, they make their own decisions.

Though if they extend him, he proably would get a raise.

So what do the Reds struggles have to do with in your opinion?

REDREAD

04-28-2010, 01:58 PM

Is that the mark of a good general manager? Getting a team what it needs? Good results?

Is that what they are suppose to do so that their manager doesn't look so bad, like the Reds do these past few seasons?

Yes, I think the mark of a good GM is recognizing what the team needs and making it happen.

And yes, by that yardstick, Walt has fallen a bit short. However, I think the big test for him is what is going to happen after this season. Is he going to make the right call on Harang and Arroyo? I am not even sure if they should be retained or not. I am going to let Walt worry about that.

I will say that a GM that only has about 5-7 million to spend in the offseason and has a lot of holes can't be expected to turn the team around overnight.

REDREAD

04-28-2010, 02:03 PM

I'm not trying to say that team was terrible, just that there were likely as many questions about that bunch as there is with this current Reds team.

Sure, there were question marks going into 1999. vaughn actually did get hurt for an extended period of time, but Hammonds and Tucker picked upt he slack. Dimitri (if I recall) was horrible in the beginning of the season, but the Reds had depth to cover it.

IMO, even without knowing the outcome however, the 1999 Reds were a lot more talented than the recent squads. Sure, there were some career years, but Bowden put himself in a position to make it happen. I really doubt DanO would've been bold enough to acquire Neagle and Cameron.. BTW, I think Cameron was one of the greatest "buy low" stories in my lifetime. The guy was immensely talented, just coming off a bad year, and the Reds were able to get him for a 1b/DH type (who was a great stick, no doubt). The current Reds would really benefit by finding another Cameron, even if they had to trade Alonso to get him. EDIT: although hopefully Bruce or Stubbs can fill that role.

_Sir_Charles_

04-28-2010, 02:25 PM

I personally think we should keep Baker. I know many are fed up with his lineups (me too) and then there are those notorious Baker'isms like vet preference & over using young arms. I personally don't buy into those at all. My thinking here is rather simple. I'd prefer stability over a revolving door at the managers desk. I also don't know if Dusty's replacement will be better or worse. Despite what many here think, Dusty is VERY knowledgeable about the game and there are MANY managers who are much worse.

He's treated the young arms with kid gloves for the most part, he's played the kids when they warrant it, he's very personable and he handles the media well. I'm not sure we could say the same about ANY replacement.

Blitz Dorsey

04-29-2010, 05:33 PM

I can't give you rep points, but I can give you my signature :beerme:

Thank you. Now that they've won 3 straight Dusty is probably looking for a lifetime contract.

bucksfan2

04-29-2010, 05:50 PM

IMO, even without knowing the outcome however, the 1999 Reds were a lot more talented than the recent squads. Sure, there were some career years, but Bowden put himself in a position to make it happen. I really doubt DanO would've been bold enough to acquire Neagle and Cameron.. BTW, I think Cameron was one of the greatest "buy low" stories in my lifetime. The guy was immensely talented, just coming off a bad year, and the Reds were able to get him for a 1b/DH type (who was a great stick, no doubt). The current Reds would really benefit by finding another Cameron, even if they had to trade Alonso to get him. EDIT: although hopefully Bruce or Stubbs can fill that role.

Paul Konerko was no slouch. And IIRC he was being tried out at 3b as well. As it ends up the Reds traded the wrong 1b prospect. It would have been interesting to see what Cameron would have done with the Reds if they never had made the Jr. trade.

Slyder

04-29-2010, 06:37 PM

Paul Konerko was no slouch. And IIRC he was being tried out at 3b as well. As it ends up the Reds traded the wrong 1b prospect. It would have been interesting to see what Cameron would have done with the Reds if they never had made the Jr. trade.

What about Ron Gant and Benito Santiago? Or Jose Guillen whom we turned into Aaron Harang?

Spring~Fields

04-29-2010, 07:38 PM

I will say that a GM that only has about 5-7 million to spend in the offseason and has a lot of holes can't be expected to turn the team around overnight.

I don't expect the general manager or manager to turn things around.

I was thinking more about the ownership group turning it around.

I haven’t seen that a general manager or manager can do that much to turn things around without the full support of a very good ownership group. Of course there is probably some exceptions in the over one hundred years of baseball, there usually are.

I do expect Mr. Baker to be extended though.

"I believe in continuity," said Jocketty, the team's fourth GM in six years. "Sometimes it takes a little time to get things the way you want them, but I think there's a lot of quality people here

"It's very important," said Baker, who was hired last October. "Good organizations keep a lot of the same people for a good length of time."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/2008-04-24-60754122_x.htm

"We're here to win," owner Bob Castellini said at the Reds' spring training camp Thursday. "You've got to throw out past formulas when you have a seven-year losing streak. Dusty is a winner. The players will play for him. And a mix of young and old is good for any enterprise. You can never do enough, but we feel we've made great strides."

Not necessarily a fan of Dusty; he's done ok with the hand that he's been dealt.

The Reds need stability. Same owner, same GM, same manager, same philosophy all through the organization.

I'm not sure if any of the guys in these spots are the right guys or not- but the owner is not going to change, and both Jocketty and Baker have track records of being winners. Not here, of course, but they have been winners in the past.

I think that if Castellini and Jock let Baker go, they will bring in someone very much like him. If that's the case, I'd rather have continuity than not.

OR...whatever manager would bring in Dave Duncan as pitching coach....:eek:

savafan

07-09-2010, 04:37 PM

These players have really responded to Dusty this year. Just by reading Votto's comments about Baker in the "Congrats Joey Votto" thread, you can tell that the team likes playing for Baker. Barring a complete and total collapse the rest of the season, I expect to see Dusty get an extension.

reds44

07-09-2010, 04:40 PM

These players have really responded to Dusty this year. Just by reading Votto's comments about Baker in the "Congrats Joey Votto" thread, you can tell that the team likes playing for Baker. Barring a complete and total collapse the rest of the season, I expect to see Dusty get an extension.
And he definatley would deserve one.

reds1869

07-09-2010, 04:41 PM

And he definatley would deserve one.

Amen to that. Dusty has done a wonderful job with this group of players. They are his type of team and I--GASP!--would love to see him back next season.